Skip to main content

Full text of "Flora Indica Vol-I"

See other formats

348                                    FLOBA INDICA.                    [Ifymphceocea.
similar to all the figures quoted above. It is quite impossible to reconcile the de-
scriptions of authors with all the plants we have brought under 2V. Lotus, whether ia
a state of nature, cultivation, or in the Herbarium. Be Candolle describes 2V. Lottes,
pubesctms, and ruora, as distinct species, but gives no diagnostic character, except the
spots of the leaves of 2V. pitlescens, which we do not find to be constant even on in-
dividuals. Andrews (Bot. Rep.) says of 2V. rubra that it is allied to 2V. Lotus, but
is certainly specifically distinct in the colour of the flowers, Sims, in the * Bota-
nical Magazine/ figures 2V. ritora, var. reset', with spotted leaves; and De Candolle
quotes the plate under his 2V. ruora, whose diagnostic character is ** foliis immacu-
latis." Lehmann (Ueber die Gattung Nymphjua) enumerates 2V. Lotus of Roxburgh's
'Flora Tmlica* as the plant of Limueus, and retains also 2V. ntbra, Ro^b., andjjw^V«s-
cens, Willd., as distinct; whereas Planchon, who publishes, iu the same year with
lehxnanu, his 'Etudes sur les Nympheacees/ quotes 2V. Lotus, Roxb., under L. pu-
bescens, Willd., and keeps 2V. Lotus, L., and N. ruora, Roxb., distinct; he also
Quotes the var. rosea under ruora, but remarks its spotted leaves. Wight and Ar-
nott distinguish 2V. pubescms, Willd., from 2V. ruora, Roxb., by its spotted leaves
and white flowers. Planchon lays some stress upon the colour of the stamens; these,
however, vary from white to red, with often an orange-yellow shade, and when much
pollen ia scattered about, they appear still more yellow, whence probably the yellow
stamens of Wight's figure. Roxburgh says of 2V. Lotus, that it differs from 2V. rubra
in the-colour of the flowers only, which are white or pink, and yet he describes a
variety of rw&ra as having rose-coloured flowers* These contradictory statements
are of themselves suggestive of all belonging to one species1; and that such is the
case we are perfectly satisfied, after an attentive study of all the states, living and
With regard to Edgeworth's 2V. sagitt&ta, it is founded on a young leaf of 2V,
rulra; we have from Assam a perfectly similar leaf attached to the same rhizome
with an older leaf of the ordinary form. Tn Royle's Herbarium we find one speci-
men labelled "2V. Lotus, rosea, &&& pn&eseens" indicating that these arc considered
one species by him; and another specimen, called "N.Lotusjlore rub™ "\$ Roxburgh's
2V. ntbru. With regard to the 2V. JDewmienMs of the ' Botanical Magazine/ it is a
common Bengal state of 2V* ruora, as described, by Roxburgh, and not, as some sup-
pose, a hybrid. We have most carefully compared the Indian plant with many
African specimens of 2V. Lotus, from the Nile, Senegal, and Sierra Leone, and con-
fidently pronounce them the same, as indeed Roxburgh supposed. Planchon charac-
terizes the Egyptian variety of 2V. Lotus as having aU the anthers shorter than the
filaments, but this ia cortainly not the case in Damietto specimens. Under 2V. pu-
bescens, Willd., he says that, except by the locality, it is difficult to distinguish it
from 2V. Lotus, but that, whereas the dense pubesceteoe is constant in 2V. pubescent,
it is accidental in 2V. Lotus• this appears to us to be saying, in other words, that one
of these is an accidental variety of the other, for if it varies in pubescence in Egypt,
and is always pubescent in India, we cannot avoid the conclusion that the pubescent
state is the typical.
Lelnnann's 2V. semisterilis is the common form of the 2V* Lotus of Xinnceus and
Roxburgh, as we ascertained on collecting it j nor can we doubt that Waldstein
and Kitaibel were right in referring the Hungarian plant to 2V. Lotus, from
does not appear to be distinguished by any character of importance. To ourselves,
Indeed, it appears very remarkable that it should not differ as a strongly marked va-
riety at least, considering that Hungary is far north of its usual habitat, and that it
ia Dependent on the thermal springs for its existence. We have very carefully com-
pared dried specimens and the plate with our Indian and Egyptian plant. We have
not seen other authentic specimens of 2V. edulis, DC., than those in Wallich's Her-
Hanchou says of the section Lotus, "anthesi nocturna/' This is a subject re-
quiring investigation. In India we have found 2V. Lotus expanded during the day,
bat cannot say whether the weather had any influence. Sims (Hot. Mag.) states that,
though the Marquis of Blandford's specimens and those in Keif Gardens blossomed